Hacker News Reader

Comment by sajithdilshan | Hacker News Reader

Why don't they just eject those chemical weapons into outer space? Even though its expensive, it's safer than just dumping it into the sea. Our generation might not suffer the consequences of this. But our children, and grandchildren will surely suffer from these environmental pollution.

View on HN

Because space isn't this thing where you eject stuff like a garbage chute.

I recommend reading up on rocketry, orbital mechanics, and modern space programs because a) it's really cool stuff! and b) you'd quickly realize how ridiculous, dangerous, and counterproductive this suggestion is.

Or just play Kerbal Space Program, judging by people who are into it.

Chemical or thermal destruction would be a lot safer and cheaper.

A really reliable rocket is successful 95% of the time. What do you do the other 5% of the time when the rocket explodes/crashes. http://www.spacelaunchreport.com/log2012.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_insurance

> Why don't they just eject those chemical weapons into outer space?

What if it falls back to Earth?

burned upon reentry

What if the rocket fails before it gets to space, and falls back to Earth?

Or if it explodes in the atmosphere, scattering chemical weapons (some of which will remain unburnt) throughout the atmosphere.

I wonder if a space elevator will ever be viable...

Is a space elevator a fantasy? Have people given up on it?

Fountains of Paradise by Arthur C. Clarke is a great book about space elevators.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/149049.The_Fountains_of_...

> What if the rocket fails before it gets to space, and falls back to Earth?

Excellent point, there are many things that could go wrong in the short time to low Earth orbit.

Not only that, it is incredibly expensive.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com